Don't start with me. This game wasn't won in the 1st 2nd or 3rd quarter. It was the last half of the 4th and Blake crapped out.

A loss is a loss. It just takes one point.

Blake cannot be relied on.

Thing is we wouldn't have even been in a position to win if it wasn't for Blake. It goes both ways

If he doesn't hit those shots we aren't in position to even win the game so your logic is flawed.

if Blake doesn't make shots we lose. If Nash doesn't make shots we lose. You can act like ONLY the 4th quarter matters, but if none of our shots fall in the first 3 quarters then the game is already over and we aren't in position to even win. So think about that

Thing is we wouldn't have even been in a position to win if it wasn't for Blake. It goes both ways

If he doesn't hit those shots we aren't in position to even win the game so your logic is flawed.

if Blake doesn't make shots we lose. If Nash doesn't make shots we lose. You can act like ONLY the 4th quarter matters, but if none of our shots fall in the first 3 quarters then the game is already over and we aren't in position to even win. So think about that

It doesn't matter. Those points Blake makes he gives right back with his mistakes.

Thing is we wouldn't have even been in a position to win if it wasn't for Blake. It goes both ways

If he doesn't hit those shots we aren't in position to even win the game so your logic is flawed.

if Blake doesn't make shots we lose. If Nash doesn't make shots we lose. You can act like ONLY the 4th quarter matters, but if none of our shots fall in the first 3 quarters then the game is already over and we aren't in position to even win. So think about that

So did Nash if you want to be technical, when his turnovers put us down by 9 going into halftime. So once again it goes both ways. So did Sacre with his 5 unforced turnovers. We could go on and on tossing blame around, it ain't just Blake's one turnover at the end of the game that cost us and all the blame shouldn't fall on his shoulders solely.

Our bench unit and people that are on our bench played well tonight and had the game within reach, that is what I'm gonna focus on. But I'm not gonna bash the guy that had 11 points and hit 3/4 from three and helped us get back in the game.

It's the old coaches saying "its a battle of he didn't come through in crunch time vs we wouldn't have been in crunch time if it wasn't for him."

Steve Blake was a net negative tonight, like the majority of the time. Not sure how that can even be debated. Shot 4/8 with 4 assists? Cool. He had 4 turnovers, multiple offensive possessions where he picked up his dribble in TERRIBLE position, and a handful of trips down the floor where he couldn't even penetrate and we were left to watch MWP awkwardly try to create looks. His lack of ability in doing anything like a legitimate PG on the offensive has screwed us over on countless possessions over the last three years. Passing along the perimeter and making post entry feeds is not facilitating an offense. Aside from spotting up to brick multiple open looks, that's all he does for us offensively.

This isn't taking into account the horrid defense he played by getting picked off on every screen as well as a few possessions where a simple crossover and first step created nearly two feet of space between his man and himself.

Steve Blake was a net negative tonight, like the majority of the time. Not sure how that can even be debated. Shot 4/8 with 4 assists? Cool. He had 4 turnovers, multiple offensive possessions where he picked up his dribble in TERRIBLE position, and a handful of trips down the floor where he couldn't even penetrate and we were left to watch MWP awkwardly try to create looks. His lack of ability in doing anything like a legitimate PG on the offensive has screwed us over on countless possessions over the last three years. Passing along the perimeter and making post entry feeds is not facilitating an offense. Aside from spotting up to brick multiple open looks, that's all he does for us offensively.

This isn't taking into account the horrid defense he played by getting picked off on every screen as well as a few possessions where a simple crossover and first step created nearly two feet of space between his man and himself.

And Meeks was a -21 and Jordan Hill was a -14. Both higher negatives than Blake.. your point?

Yet the opinion is our bench played well and our bench players looked better so yes

Nash facilitates an offense, creates clean looks for others, and he sets up the swing by making the correct read the majority of the time. Blake can do none of this, he and Nash are worlds apart even when it comes to basic skills from the lead guard position. Nash also had 7 assists and multiple possessions where the man who caught the pass did not take advantage (either bobbled the pass or hesitated) and kept him from racking up another dime. Blake doesn't do that. 4 turnovers from a guard who's basic duty is to swing the ball on the perimeter and spot-up has a bigger negative impact than a floor general who does so much more on the floor. There really is no comparison between the two. This is clearly evident in the tremendous drop-off of the team offensively whenever either Nash or Kobe are off the floor. I find myself dreading the Blake substitution more and more because I know just how terrible the unit will look if Blake is in the backcourt without Bryant to cover for his sorry ass.

If Kobe is there in the backcourt alongside him, he ends up becoming the lead facilitator in our offense, not our backup guard who SHOULD be the guy doing this. Blake can't even fulfill the basic job description of a pointguard while on the floor. No facilitating, zero defensive ability, can't drive in and collapse defenses, and he's completely unreliable as a shooter.

The +/- stat is not reflective of a single player, but of a five man unit. Guess who was the lead guard on the floor for much of the game when our offense fell apart and we couldn't generate anything worthwhile early in the shot clock? It definitely wasn't Steve Nash.